Tag Archives: poverty

40 Bad Reasons for Prison Statistics Pt. 4

Will this be 4 for 4 failures for Bill Quigley’s prison reasons?

So far, Bill Quigley is 0 for 3 in his reasons why so many black and poor people are in prison.  It’s really getting quite comical but he has one chance to pull this out of the liberal morass that he’s quickly sinking in.  Let’s see if he can turn it around in this final chapter of his 40 reasons why our jails are full of black and poor people.

Thirty-One. The DOJ reports another 3.9 million people are on probation.

For crimes they committed and were convicted of.

Thirty-Two. The DOJ reports an additional 850,000 people are on parole.

For crimes they committed and were convicted of.

Thirty-Three. The DOJ reported in 2012 that as many as 100 million people have a criminal record, and over 94 million of those records are online.

For crimes they committed and were convicted of.  Are we seeing a pattern here?

Thirty-Four. Everyone can find out people have a record.

Only for serious crimes.  Misdemeanors are not searchable.  Of course, maybe the solution is just not to have a record in the first place.

Thirty-Five. Race is a multiplier of disadvantage in unemployment for people who get out of prison.

Again, don’t commit crimes, don’t go to prison and you have no disadvantage from it.  I wonder why this is something that Quigley never, ever, ever brings up.

Thirty-Six. Families are hurt by this.

It’s typical liberal whining.  Families are harmed by things that people make a conscious  decision to do, things that if they didn’t do, they wouldn’t have problems, things that if they were responsible and made good life choices, they wouldn’t have problems, yet nothing is ever their fault.  Ever.

Thirty-Seven. Convicted people cannot get jobs after they get out.

Then they shouldn’t go in.  Actions have consequences.  Deal with it.

Thirty-Eight. The US spends $80 billion on this big business of corrections every year.

Indeed we do, but we do it because it’s necessary.  If nobody broke the law, if nobody went to prison, we wouldn’t be spending that money.  That’s something that liberals refuse to deal with though.  They think everyone is a victim.  They are wrong.  These people are perpetrators.

Thirty-Nine. Putting more people in jail creates more poverty.

No, people making poor life choices creates more poverty.  People dropping out of school.  People getting involved with drugs and gangs.  People having children out of wedlock before they are financially prepared.  People committing crimes.  People doing stupid things.  All of these things create more poverty.  The way out is clear.  Stop doing stupid shit.

Forty. Putting all these problems together and you can see why the Center for American Progress rightly concludes “Today, a criminal record serves as both a direct cause and consequence of poverty.”

Ah yes, a far left think tank, why am I not surprised?  And while they absolutely provide the truth in this quote, they don’t recognize the fact of the matter.  Yes, a criminal record will screw up your life.  The secret is not to get one.  The secret is to live a decent life.  It might be difficult.  It might be culturally challenging.  That doesn’t matter. We all have to make difficult choices every single day.  It’s the people who do the right thing, the people who make good choices, those are the people who succeed and better their lives.  But liberals don’t care about bettering your life.  Everyone is a victim.  Nothing is ever your fault. It’s all about pointing fingers at everyone but yourself.  That’s why liberalism is so absurd.

Liberal Irresponsibility and the Poor

lincoln-lincoln-welfare-political-poster-1272242819In a recent discussion, I found that, once again, liberals are crazy.  The discussion started out with a claim that kids from wealthy families are much more likely to succeed than kids from poor families but it quickly devolved into a liberal whine session about how the poor are so downtrodden and deserve lots of government money because, well, they’re poor.  Now keep in mind, when I describe these people as liberal, that’s what they self-identify as, I’m not just applying a label derogatorily, this is what they call themselves.  I just wanted to make that clear.

So myself and a number of other conservatives started pointing out, as we’ve done many times in the past, that it is the actions of the poor, by and large, which place them in such detrimental conditions.  They generally breed like rabbits out of wedlock.  Their children generally do poorly in school and drop out before graduation.  They generally get involved in things like drugs and gangs.  They generally end up in prison.  They generally do not work and if they do work, they remain in low-paying positions instead of being promoted.  This is why they are poor, because they generally make  bad decisions in their lives which lead to bad outcomes and this goes on generation after generation because very few of them ever catch the clue that they’re doing something wrong. Conservatives point out, quite correctly, that if we’d just help these people to improve their detrimental behaviors, we wouldn’t have to keep sending them government checks because, over time, they could dig their way out of poverty through hard work and personal responsibility.

But the liberals don’t want to hear that at all.  In fact, I realized something after reading a lot of liberal diatribe on the subject.  The liberals never mention the poor at all when it comes to a “solution”.  They aren’t willing to address the actions of the poor at all, or even suggest that they have any part whatsoever in their “salvation”.  They only have one idea and that’s for the wealthy to give more money to the poor.  Money, money, money, it plays like a broken record.  Gimme gimme gimme!  But giving money to the poor doesn’t actually solve the problem, it just makes it more palatable to liberals who want those poor votes. They don’t want the poor to become successful or they’ll lose the votes when it turns out that the conservative method actually works to pull them up out of poverty.  The same is true of racism and sexism and all of the other things that liberals pretend to be against.  They’re not so against them that they want them to end, that would be costly at the polling place!  So they just talk about it and throw around other people’s money, while carefully doing nothing to upset the status quo.  They can’t have that, can they?

What needs to happen is that we have to teach the poor how to stop being poor.  We need to tell them the one real truth that has been denied to them by the liberals, that their culture has ruined their chances for success and the liberals have lied to them for decades.  We need to teach them how to stop breeding more than they can afford and if that means that they have no kids at all, so be it.  Life isn’t fair.  Get over it.  We need to make them stay in school and get an education, even if it isn’t the same education that they might get in a better neighborhood, it is still better than no education at all.  We need to get them off drugs and out of gangs and tell them to stay out of prison.  We need to teach them a work ethic, to get to work on time, go above and beyond expectations and get promoted.  Sitting in the same low-paying job for years on end should be an embarrassment.  If you can’t improve, there’s something wrong with you! Keep improving and as you do, you can have better things in life, you can afford to have more kids if you want, you can afford to have the big screen TVs and the fancy cars, you have to earn them first, not just whine that you don’t have them before you earn them.  It’s not rocket science but liberals still hate it because it places any of the blame at all on the poor.  Sorry, the majority of the blame needs to be placed on the poor.  They need to start learning how to live life for success, not with their hands out for a government check.

But will the liberals ever accept that?  Of course not, it might cost them votes.

10 Poverty “Myths” Not Busted At All

poverty-mythbustersThis is another one of those things that floats around the Internet, seeking some kind of validation, when it really makes no sense. What do you expect coming from the overly-emotional political left?  I actually saw this on Wil Wheaton’s Tumblr feed and while I like Wil, his politics are just as bad as most liberals.  So here, according to Mother Jones, a far left liberal rag, are 10 Poverty Myths Busted, but not so’s you’d notice if you had a clue in your head.

You will notice that in a lot of these, the liberals cook the data, ignore the parts they don’t like and make absurd claims about what remains in order to make even the slightest shred of their claims seem reasonable.  Many of their claims are faulty, quite a few are out and out lies.  I’ve not found any of them that rested on solid data or recognized the actual problem behind their claims.  It’s just more nonsensical liberal rhetoric.

So let’s get started, shall we?

1. Single moms are the problem. Only 9 percent of low-income, urban moms have been single throughout their child’s first five years. Thirty-five percent were married to, or in a relationship with, the child’s father for that entire time.

So what about the rest of them?  This only accounts for 44% of low-income, urban moms.  What is it that they don’t want you to know?  This only gives you the extremes, the ones who never have any kind of relationship at all and the ones who have a single relationship with the child’s father.  So 56% are in serial relationships?  That’s not healthy for the children either.  Besides, we know that the majority of the 35% extreme are not actually legally married, they’re just living with this guy and that, again, is not healthy for the children.  We also know that a large number of poor women have multiple children from multiple fathers, again, not healthy.  Sorry, color me not impressed.

2. Absent dads are the problem. Sixty percent of low-income dads see at least one of their children daily. Another 16 percent see their children weekly.

I’m sorry, that’s not a relationship.  The point of a parent is to raise one’s children and that’s a 24/7 thing.  Seeing one’s children and being a parent are two entirely different things.  If these “fathers” are not living in the home with the mother in, at the very least, a committed monogamous relationship, they’re doing it entirely wrong.  Further, you really have to look at how they phrase these answers because we know they’re trying to spin it in the most favorable light to their side.  They say they “see” their kids.  They do not say they interact with their kids, they do not say they influence their kids, they do not say they act as a father to their kids, just that they see them.  I see lots of people every day, that doesn’t mean that I have any impact on their lives.  Seeing is not parenting, visiting is not being an integral part of their lives.  This is just more bullshit.

3. Black dads are the problem. Among men who don’t live with their children, black fathers are more likely than white or Hispanic dads to have a daily presence in their kids’ lives.

Daily presence.  Hmmm.  Not a father.  That’s a sperm donor with visitation rights.  And you want to know why they’re more likely to have a daily presence in their kids’ lives?  Because they have no jobs.  They are not providing a role model, just a presence.

4. Poor people are lazy. In 2004, there was at least one adult with a job in 60 percent of families on food stamps that had both kids and a nondisabled, working-age adult.

Again, they don’t talk about the 40% who did not.  Of course, my position is that virtually anyone living in poverty has no damn business having kids to begin with.  If you cannot afford to provide a decent life for your children, you should not have them, period.  But this is something liberals, those self-entitled hippies, don’t want to talk about.  They think people are entitled to do whatever they want and if they can’t afford to pay for the consequences of their actions, the government needs to step in and provide.  Nobody should ever be told that they can’t do something, “can’t” is a bad word in the liberal dictionary.

5. If you’re not officially poor, you’re doing okay. The federal poverty line for a family of two parents and two children in 2012 was $23,283. Basic needs cost at least twice that in 615 of America’s cities and regions.

I thought this was “poverty myths”, why are they talking about people who are not officially poor?  If you don’t live below the poverty line, you don’t belong on this list.  But hey, it’s here, let’s address it.  If you live in a city where you cannot afford your basic needs, MOVE!  Get a better job!  Get a job in the first place!  Don’t drop out of school, don’t get involved in gangs or drugs, don’t go to prison, don’t have a family.  Be responsible.  Nah, that would never work.

6. Go to college, get out of poverty. In 2012, about 1.1 million people who made less than $25,000 a year, worked full time, and were heads of household had a bachelor’s degree.

Nobody ever says that going to college is a magic ticket to getting out of poverty, you still have to work your ass off and earn your way out. If you continue to make bad decisions, degree in hand, you’re still going to be a failure.

7. We’re winning the war on poverty. The number of households with children living on less than $2 a day per person has grown 160 percent since 1996, to 1.65 million families in 2011.

We’re not even fighting a war on poverty.  In America, we like to declare war on things but we’re never serious.  It’s all just a PR campaign and anyone with half a clue should realize that.  Of course, the Democrats are not at all interested in ending poverty because that represents a significant chunk of their voter base.  They need the impoverished to keep getting elected.  The Democrats might talk the part but they have no vested interest in stopping poverty.

8. The days of old ladies eating cat food are over. The share of elderly single women living in extreme poverty jumped 31 percent from 2011 to 2012.

And that’s a shame.  As heartless as this is going to sound, what did those women do their entire lives to plan for their retirement?  Personal responsibility, does anyone remember that?  It’s sad that so few people plan ahead for their retirement and then expect everyone else to pick up the slack.  Case in point, my parents were never wealthy by any means but they worked hard and made some wise investments over the years and today, although my father is dead, my mother is extremely comfortable, in fact, she’s got at least $2 million in assets socked away and will live the rest of her life comfortably.  She just sold the house I grew up in and bought another, smaller house with cash.  So what are these old ladies eating cat food doing wrong?

9. The homeless are drunk street people. One in 45 kids in the United States experiences homelessness each year. In New York City alone, 22,000 children are homeless.

I don’t know of anyone who has ever said that either, I’d have to see where Mother Jones is getting their quotations.  Regardless, the part in bold has nothing whatsoever to do with the part that follows.  Regardless of how many children are affected by the actions of their parents, that says nothing about why their parents are homeless.  The fact that they tried desperately to twist the question proves they have nothing intelligent to say on the subject.  In fact, we know that marijuana and cocaine use increases significantly among the poor and destitute and that in areas where research has been done, it’s shown that an average of 75% of the poor are routine drug and alcohol users.  More lies from the liberals.

10. Handouts are bankrupting us. In 2012, total welfare funding was 0.47 percent of the federal budget.

Which is complete bullshit.  It ignores Medicare, Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which in 2013 made up 22% of the federal budget, more than we spent on national defense.  Another 12% of the budget is spent on so-called “safety net programs” that fund things like the Earned Income Tax Credit, Supplemental Social Security, SNAP (food stamps), school meals, low-income housing assistance, child care assistance, and assistance in meeting home energy bills; and various other programs such as those that aid abused and neglected children.  This is purposefully misleading, such handouts make up 34% of the whole of the federal budget.  It refers only to a small percentage of welfare programs which are paid for by the federal government, it ignores all of the programs funded at the state and local level, etc.  How dishonest can these people get?

At the end of the day we’re still left with a poverty class that is largely there because of their own actions or lack of actions and utter lack of personal responsibility.  The liberals want to give them more money.  I want them to stop being so irresponsible in the first place.  It’s one thing to say “you got into a pinch, here, let me help you out”, it’s entirely another to say “you’ve fucked up your entire life, you want no part of digging yourself out, you just want money for the rest of your life”.  No.  Sorry, it doesn’t work that way and anyone who thinks it should is an idiot.

Trader Joe’s: Why Racism Is a Lost Cause in America

Trader_Joe'sThe typical liberal talking points on race relations always casts the evil white men in opposition to the peace-loving poor blacks, in fact, the position among many liberals is that it is utterly impossible for black people to ever be racist because they have no way to push their racism onto others.

I call bullshit.

When the Portland Development Commission decided to sell an empty plot of land in a traditionally black neighborhood to Trader Joe’s at a $2.4 million dollar discount, the black community got up in arms because, according to them, it would bring too many white folks to their neighborhood.  I shit you not.

Yes, the PDC did sell the land at a significant discount, but it isn’t like it was being used for anything, it was an empty plot of land that had been sitting fallow for many years.  There were no plans to use the land for anything, no one was interested in buying it, but the local black community wants the city to build more low-cost housing and other freebies instead of letting a company improve the city.

The Portland African American Leadership Forum (PAALF) wrote a letter to the PDC, complaining that “Given the long-standing list of promises made, and yet unfulfilled by the PDC to prevent community displacement, PAALF is and will remain opposed to any development in N/NE Portland that does not primarily benefit the Black community.”  It also states “This decision is the opposite and reflects the city’s overall track record of implementing policies that serve to uproot, displace and disempower our most vulnerable community members.”

Hey, did you people ever stop to think that if you got *JOBS*, you wouldn’t need low-cost housing?  Never crossed your minds, did it?  Maybe if you had money, got out of the ghettos and started acting like useful and productive members of society, you wouldn’t be so “disempowered” and “vulnerable”.  But no, they don’t want to work, they want to be given government freebies.  This Trader Joe’s is going into a new shopping center where there will be many new jobs available, yet PAALF would rather leave the lot empty than allow businesses which will add to the overall tax base for Portland?  Nope, they just have their hands out.  Gimme! Gimme! Gimme!

I wouldn’t say if this was an isolated incident but it’s not.  I see stories like this all the time where poor minorities think that instead of getting off their lazy asses and getting jobs and pulling themselves out of their self-imposed ghettos by their bootstraps, the world owes them a living and they don’t have to do anything.  Well fuck you, PAALF.  Fuck entitlement-happy liberals.  At least Portland is doing something, which is more than I can say for any of you.

Get a fucking job already and stop whining.